Downtown Zoning Overlay

[TheArtist]

  In a nutshell, as I understand it,  this overlay allows a property owner to "add zoning" to his or her property.

I don't know what kind of zoning specifically, will have to do some research, but from what I heard you can do things like, (must build up to sidewalk, have "fenestrations" aka doors and windows".) Definitely want to know more though.

I think an example of where someone might want to use this is say I own a large chunk of property, or a lot near one I have already developed, and may want to sell part of that property or want the one next door, or across from me to compliment my development (perhaps I have built a pedestrian friendly shop and would like whatever goes in next door or across the street to compliment my development, but don't want to develop it myself).

   I can't help but be reminded of the old story us natives are told as kids about Waite Phillips and what he did downtown.  We were told he built the Philtower first, but then in order to "protect his investment" he went ahead and built the Philcade across the street.  This tells me that he realized that something could go in across from him that could have brought down his property values, or harmed his investment in some way. Most of us are not that wealthy.  But this overlay could in effect help some property owners be more assured of what will go into a location and that it would compliment their investment.

 I believe that some in the Brady Arts district were the ones who initiated the prospect of having this downtown overlay potential be added to the new zoning code.

 This overlay potential was briefly brought up at the last DCC meeting (I was recently elected to be on the DCC as the retail representative), apparently there are some on the board who are against it. I had a short polite discussion about it during the meeting with one of the other board members and then it was suggested that we get together and form a little committee and discuss it elsewhere lol.

 I think it's a perfectly fine idea. Doesn't seem to be terribly intrusive. I would be happy to see more zoning in some areas but that does not seem to be in the cards.  Appears that a decision needs to be made soon or it will not be added to the new Comprehensive Plan, and once this opportunity passes, we got what we got.

The person I discussed this with did not like "adding zoning to an area that allows you to do what you want, why add restrictions, isn't more freedom better for development, the comprehensive plan should work to add more options, allow more types of development in more areas, not add more restrictions, etc."
 
Does anyone else have any info about this overlay and or thoughts, pro or con, about it?  

I would really like to meet with and chat with whoever it was in the Brady Arts District who apparently brought this up.  I am having a meeting with the "opposing party" this coming Wednesday and would like to have all the info I can.





   

[carltonplace]

Downtown should not be "anything goes" at all. Look what that has done to Brookside. FAIL.

[PonderInc]

I would be cautious about starting a fight about a specific downtown overlay in advance of the zoning code update being approved.

Once the zoning code is approved, the overlay language will allow folks to create whatever overlays they want in their neighborhoods.  If you stir up a nest of hornets in advance, opponents may fight to strike the overlay language from the code altogether.  I don't know if this would actually happen, but I've seen uninformed opposition crush plenty of other good ideas (conservation districts, Form Based Codes, ordinances related to downtown demolitions or landscaping requirements, etc).

My advice would be: 1) stay informed about the zoning code and the public feedback that occurs; 2) make sure the zoning code language allows the type of overlay you would like to see; 3) begin talking to like-minded people and start thinking about the overlay language you would like to see in your neck of the woods; 4) begin thinking about the boundaries of your proposed overlay and get support from the property owners within those boundaries; 5) once the zoning code update is approved, go for it!

An overlay would NOT need to apply to the entirety of downtown.  It could just apply to whatever areas people want based on the proposed boundaries.  So, there's nothing preventing Brady from having their own overlay, even if other parts of downtown would rather not have any protections at all.  

This analysis is based on my reading of Chapter 20 of the proposed zoning code.  If anyone can correct or add to anything I've said above, please chime in.

[Edited 3/24/15 @ 6:28 PM]
OK, I just took my own advice and re-read part of the proposed zoning code.  There are three types of overlays: HP, Residential Character, and Plan-Based.

From what I can tell, "Plan-based" overlays are not allowed within the Central Business District.  

Here's the language:
20.040-C Underlying Zoning
PB overlays may be approved in areas classified in any residential or nonresidential base zoning district, except the CB district. PB overlays may not be applied in combination with CB zoning.

I have no idea why this is.  Traditionally, downtown has been exempt from most zoning requirements, so you can pretty much do whatever you want.  But I don't understand why you wouldn't want to allow a downtown district to add an overlay if desired.

Here's the "Purpose and Intended Use" about PB Overlays:
20.040-B Purpose and Intended Use
1. PB overlays are intended to allow for adjustments in an area's underlying base zoning as a means of carrying out the policies of an adopted neighborhood or area plan. PB overlays may be used to relax or eliminate requirements that apply under base zoning or to impose requirements in addition to those of base zoning. PB overlays may be appropriate for one or more of the following purposes:
 a. Protect unique development, building or land use patterns that are not adequately addressed by otherwise applicable zoning regulations; or
 b. Promote reinvestment and redevelopment in areas where change is desirable and where existing zoning regulations hinder or fall short of achieving desired outcomes.
2. Without limiting the general purpose and intent of §20.040-B1, PB overlays may be used for the following express purposes:
 a. Allow principal or accessory uses that are not allowed under base zoning; or
 b. Establish reasonable, clear and objective site, building and design standards that promote the general purpose established in §20.040-B1.
3. PB overlays may not be used to:
 a. Impose greater restrictions on residential density or nonresidential floor area than the applicable base zoning;
 b. Prohibit uses allowed under base zoning;
 c. Prohibit off-street parking that is otherwise allowed under the base zoning;
 d. Impose subjective design requirements; or
 e. Require review by boards or commissions that are not required under base zoning.

[TheArtist]

  Actually I think right now that the overlay language currently in the code would not be allowed in downtown in the CB 


Chapter 20 | Overlay Districts Section 20.040-C

   PB, Plan-Based Overlays

PB overlays may be approved in areas classified in any residential or nonresidential base zoning district, except the CB district. PB overlays may not be applied in combination with CB zoning.

[TheArtist]

You beat me to the punch lol

Also I believe that you don't have to have it in an entire district, but it could be a single property owner who has about half a block minimum worth of property. In a way this would "increases property rights" by allowing a property owner to have the ability to apply the zoning to his or her own property.

Frankly I think it should be allowable for any property owner no matter what the size of their property. 

[TheArtist]

  Some other restrictions.

Required Plan
PB overlays may be approved only when the overlay is consistent with and will help to implement a neighborhood plan or other plan that has been:
1. Prepared following an inclusive, transparent, and equitable planning process includ- ing opportunities for property owner and citizen participation;
2. Adopted by the planning commission; and
3. Approved by the city council.
Minimum Contiguous Areas
Proposed PB overlay boundaries must encompass at least 10 lots, and in all cases must include at least an entire block face. Smaller areas may be designated as PB overlays if they abut and extend an existing PB overlay district.
EstablishmentorAmendmentofPBOverlayDistricts
Property owner-initiated applications to establish or expand the boundaries of a PB over- lay district must be signed by all (100%) owners of property within the boundaries of the proposed zoning map amendment. See §20.010-D for additional procedures and require- ments governing establishment or amendment of PB overlay districts.
Recordation
The land use administrator must file a copy of all PB overlay zoning map amendment or- dinances and maps indicating the boundaries of approved RC overlays in the county clerk's office of the county in which the property is located.




Like much of the new comprehensive plan, there has been a lot of stuff put in which will make it ridiculous to try and go through the long arduous process that can be railroaded at any point to "well lets do a study" "lets form a committee" "lets talk about this at the next meeting" etc. etc. so that the naysayers can block it.  If any of you have been to these types of meetings where these things try to get approved by a property owner, you know what I am talking about. Months of delays can easily put a person off even trying, and when the months turn into years... well. Whats it been for the Form Based Codes now going on 20 years and it's still not really quite there or something I don't know lol.

Like I have said before, we are not getting any new zoning with this new comprehensive plan, just the ability to spend decades fighting for possibly getting some new zoning, which isn't much different than now.

[PonderInc]

Like I have said before, we are not getting any new zoning with this new comprehensive plan, just the ability to spend decades fighting for possibly getting some new zoning, which isn't much different than now.

I understand your frustration with the fact that the zoning maps won't change up front.  I share your concern that it will take years for enough people to "opt-in" to better zoning options.  And I agree that having a patchwork of zoning is not the fastest way to get where we need to go.

However, I do believe that we are moving in the right direction. We will finally have the ability to zone for traditional, mixed-use developments.  (Ground-floor retail with 2 or 3 floors of residential above with no setbacks and reduced parking requirements as well as shared parking and bike parking.)

Also, Tulsans would go berserk if large-scale changes were made to the zoning map all at once.  Hundreds / thousands of people who don't know a zoning ordinance from a hole in the wall would begin screaming about the destruction of the free world and the coming Armageddon. It would distract from and crush the new zoning code and prevent people from focusing on the actual meat of the code (which we all need to do--there are improvements that need to occur).

My belief is that people need to see examples of something before they can support it.  If a few good developers can start creating terrific new mixed-use spaces (traditional building form in the right context), people will start to get it.  Then our politicians can start seeing the economic benefits, and we'll have more support.  I think that it will get the ball rolling, and more and more people will want to rezone larger areas.  Then, you'll start to see the maps changing.

I just don't think Tulsa is ready to jump in with both feet (our motto: "Tulsa - Scared of Our Own Shadow!"), but once people start seeing real life examples of high-quality mixed-use infill, they will catch on.